Corporations Should Consider
their Social Responsibilities

The
Occupy Movement has demonstrated that there is popular sentiment
against the rich and powerful in our world, whether it is characterized
as the banks, as corporate bosses or those who are known for their
conspicuous consumption, while others in this recession lose their
homes and businesses or, indeed, are sick or starving with no one to
help.

There is no question that there are institutional and
corporate “bad guys” out there. Just look at the news or do some
surfing on Google. Soft drink companies are union busting in
Latin America, accused of murder and rape in order to bring about
“labour peace.”
Mining companies, often Canadian ones, are tearing up the land in Latin
America, Africa and Asia with little regard for the natural
environment, aboriginal culture, human rights and fair pay.

Drug
companies are often cited for promoting expensive name brands and
blocking the distribution of cheaper generic varieties in the name of
profit, while the world’s poor continue to struggle with HIV/AIDS,
malaria and other diseases. Nestle’s and Hershey continue to
benefit from child slavery in the cocoa and sugar plantations of West
Africa, rather than sign on to the fair trade regimen.

Corporations
have lobbied and organized to fight back against regulations that would
curb their profit-making ways. “Reasonable” profit may not be the
villain, but certainly the exploitation of producers and workers and
the degradation of the environment in the service of maximum financial
yields are. Aside from obvious forms of evil-doing, companies
also drive hard bargains in the countries and communities in which they
operate, demanding tax breaks, subsidies and infrastructure projects
(buildings, hydro, telephone, roads).

As well, Free Trade
Agreements have made the world friendlier than ever for multinational
corporations. The possibility that any national regulation on
global companies might hamper their ability to make maximum profits can
bring about a lawsuit under NAFTA, for instance, to be arbitrated by
the World Trade Organization. As the vast majority of
multinationals are American, Japanese or European, the rest are at a
disadvantage to stand in their way, especially the poorer countries
where these companies are extracting mineral resources and agricultural
commodities.

Corporate social responsibility is not a new
idea. Since the 1970s, poorer countries, NGOs and social
movements have been lobbying for fairer treatment in trade and economic
development. The Group of 77 (now made up of 123 United Nations
member states) has long been a voice for developing and non-aligned
nations seeking a better deal from the rich world.

Kofi
Annan, past UN Secretary General set up the Global Compact, a voluntary
initiative aimed at getting business involved in adhering to and
promoting ten principles derived from previous UN declarations and
conventions, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Rio
Declaration on Environment & Development, and the UN Convention
Against Corruption. While this is a laudable initiative, it is
not legally binding – there is no compulsion and there is no inspection.

A recent Canada Business Network
newsletter, put out by our federal government for entrepreneurs, points
out that being socially responsible (or being seen to be) is a way of
“staying competitive in today’s market." It goes on to say that
businesses are recognizing that there is increasing consumer demand for
products and services that take responsibility for their impact on the
environment, their employees and the general public.

It
is suggested that companies adopt “green” practices in their operations
and develop community outreach programs that benefit the “less
fortunate.”

Unfortunately, no questions are asked of many of these companies about the “other side” of their operations.

One
company which currently advertises its major donation to the
preservation of polar bears also stands accused of human rights abuses
around the world.

In Manitoba, a number of institutions and
businesses have taken steps to be socially responsible. Some
credit unions have become strong supporters of community economic
development initiatives, well beyond the usual funding of kids’ hockey
jerseys. Many companies are implementing environmental audits of
their buildings and programs to make them less wasteful and polluting.

Liquor Marts have brought in growing amounts of organic and fair trade wines, while grocery chains do the same with coffees, teas and chocolate products.

The
challenge is to go beyond the Jekyll & Hyde situation where
corporations may carry on exploitive practices in one realm while they
do something socially responsible in another – where they take land
away from indigenous people in a developing country in order to extract
their resources while using a small portion of their profits to support
a social service project back home.

Can multinationals
be good citizens in all their activities? Is this a realistic
goal or does it defy the definition of multinational business?
While these questions are yet to be answered, past practices don’t make
us optimistic.Zack Gross works
for the Manitoba Council for International
Co-operation (MCIC), a
coalition of more than 40 international development organizations.